Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine of KRW 400,000,00,000,00,000,000,00

The above fine is imposed against the Defendants.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A shall be the chairperson of “E”, Defendant B shall be the chairperson of “F”, and Defendant C shall be the chairperson of “E”.

No one shall hold any outdoor assembly or stage any demonstration at a place within 100 meters from the boundary of a court office building of any level.

Nevertheless, from around 11:00 to around 11:30 on September 12, 2013, the Defendants: (a) around the 100-meter Seoul Eastern District Court of Gwangjin-gu, Seoul, the venue where assembly is prohibited; (b) Defendant B reported the society; (c) Defendant C reported the progress; and (d) Defendant C reported the progress; and (c) a large banner and “Public Prosecutor’s Office” described as “Ih Council check for the investigation into the arrest of a member of the GH Council, which is the month of embezzlement and embezzlement,” with 13 members belonging to the above E, stating “Ih Council members, i.e., a member of the GH Council., a member of the Gu Council.” (i.e., a member of the GuH), and (ii) using micro and ampers, etc., read out and read the aforementioned relief.

Accordingly, the Defendants conspired to hold an outdoor assembly at a place where assembly is prohibited.

Summary of Evidence

1. Entry of the Defendants in part of each protocol concerning the interrogation of suspects by the prosecution

1. The order of the submission of opinions;

1. Application of the video CD-related statutes;

1. Defendants: Article 23 subparag. 1 and Article 11 of the Assembly and Demonstration Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act, and the selection of fines for negligence

1. Defendants to be detained in the workhouse: Articles 70 and 69(2) of the former Criminal Act (Amended by Act No. 12575, May 14, 2014)

1. Defendants of the provisional payment order: Determination on the Defendants and their defense counsel’ assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The Defendants asserted that they did not hold an assembly as stated in the facts charged in the instant case, and that they did not hold an assembly, and even if they correspond to a family affairs assembly, they are acts for the purpose of promoting the investigation by expanding the corruption of the members of the GH Gu council and urging the investigation.